Comments on: Revisiting the Merrill acquisition http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2009/06/11/revisiting-the-merrill-acquisition/ A slice of lime in the soda Sun, 26 Oct 2014 19:05:02 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=4.2.5 By: gospel online http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2009/06/11/revisiting-the-merrill-acquisition/comment-page-1/#comment-53331 Mon, 29 Sep 2014 13:49:45 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2009/06/11/revisiting-the-merrill-acquisition/#comment-53331 This is really interesting, You’re a very skilled blogger. I have joined your feed and look forward to seeking more of your excellent post. Also, I have shared your website in my social networks!

]]>
By: dazedandconfused http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2009/06/11/revisiting-the-merrill-acquisition/comment-page-1/#comment-2636 Thu, 11 Jun 2009 23:47:20 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2009/06/11/revisiting-the-merrill-acquisition/#comment-2636 if you read the MAC he really didnt have much room to get out of the deal, so really you are overstating his strategic intelligence. The fed really were only telling him what was obvious. Furthermore if you believe that Lewis paid that price initially to prevent the failure of the banking system then surely he would have felt the same before pulling out of the deal. as its happens the guy is just an idiot.

]]>
By: Greg http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2009/06/11/revisiting-the-merrill-acquisition/comment-page-1/#comment-2620 Thu, 11 Jun 2009 17:28:07 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2009/06/11/revisiting-the-merrill-acquisition/#comment-2620 Instead of Lewis being in front of committee about this deal, shouldn’t Bernanke & Paulson? Lewis had no choice, if he refused, he would have been pushed out and his successor would have accepted. Its argued that this deal was bad for BoA shareholders, but wouldn’t a unchecked financial meltdown have been even worse?

]]>
By: Don the libertarian Democrat http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2009/06/11/revisiting-the-merrill-acquisition/comment-page-1/#comment-2611 Thu, 11 Jun 2009 14:39:17 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2009/06/11/revisiting-the-merrill-acquisition/#comment-2611 “What he should have done is simply told Bernanke in no uncertain terms that his fiduciary duty to his shareholders forced him to back out of the Merrill deal, even if doing so was going to cost him his job.”

No doubt that’s true. But it’s wrong, nevertheless. You’ve advanced a Kantian view, in which there are clear principles, universal ones, in fact, and it’s simply a matter of following them. Of course, the response of the Existentialists to such a view, or system building based upon it, like Hegel’s, was laughter, amusement, scorn. Such principles are part of human conduct, but only part. Human beings aren’t smart enough to figure out such rules, and even less able to capably decide which one to apply in each particular context. That’s why, religiously speaking, Existentialists often resort to the concept of grace. Humans need God’s grace, because actions aren’t going to cut it. Too many mistakes, even in a well-intentioned life.

Lewis should have bought Lehman. I’m glad that he bought Merrill. My guess is that he believed that, having done the only thing that the Fed, Treasury, and FDIC, said could be done with large financial concerns, namely sell them to another large financial concern, he assumed that the govt was implicitly guaranteeing the solvency of the B of A. It turns out that he was correct. In the process, however, B of A shareholders and creditors have taken a bit of a hit. For that, he should be fired. But he did the right thing.

Lewis should simply stand up and say that he did the right thing, and if people don’t like it, F— Off!I’m a better man than all of you. He shouldn’t apologize, grovel, or try and excuse himself. He should admit that there are solid, if simpleminded, reasons to fire him. He should tell people to do due diligence on this. No doubt he’ll be considered insane, as I’ll be for writing this post. Nevertheless, Lewis should remind himself:

“The struggle itself towards the heights is enough to fill a man’s heart. One must imagine Sisyphus happy”

]]>
By: Griff http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2009/06/11/revisiting-the-merrill-acquisition/comment-page-1/#comment-2610 Thu, 11 Jun 2009 14:38:18 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2009/06/11/revisiting-the-merrill-acquisition/#comment-2610 Hard to know just whom we should believe more, given all the posturing by FED, Paulson, Lewis and Thain. In retrospect, certainly an accurate statement that a subsequent failure of Merrill (probably that same week) would’ve been far more deleterious than what we eventually have experienced. My two lincolns say if Lewis had doubts then the BAC BOARD should have backed out due to the MAC or repriced accordingly given new information.

I would include a 3rd part in your linkage: LEH, AIG, and MER. During that period, the agencies (FED, FDIC, Treasury, et al) were behaving in a most unwise format for intervention. Lehman, NO; AIG, YES; Wachovia (Citi buys YES, wait NO); and then Washington Mutual. of course AIG gets it a 2nd, 3rd, etc…

Just wondering, which rock is mr Thain hiding under these days anyway ?

]]>